MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406929541 · doi:10.1504/ijhrdm.2024.144131

The relative and respective effects of social support on life-domain interactions

2024· article· en· W4406929541 on OpenAlex
Felix Ballesteros Leiva, Sylvie St Onge, Samba Déme

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Human Resources Development and Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomain (mathematical analysis)BusinessManagementPsychologyPublic relationsAccountingEconomicsPolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based upon the conservation of resource theory, this study investigates the respective and relative effects of various social support sources on employees' perceptions regarding the conflicts and enrichments they experienced between their work-life (WL) and personal life (PL) in both directions (WL → PL and PL → WL). Our survey has 798 employee respondents. Concerning their life-domain conflicts, results show that variance in their WL → PL conflicts is accounted for by sources of support in the workplace, in the following order: organisation, supervisor, and co-workers. Variance in their PL → WL conflicts is explained, in order, by the support received from family and friends and the organisation. Concerning their life-domain enrichments, results show that the support received from their supervisor accounts for the variance in WL → PL and PL → WL enrichments. In contrast, the one obtained from family and friends only explains the variance in PL → WL enrichment. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of these results.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it